Speaker 1: Welcome to the late debate.
Speaker 2: Dear me, it sounds like golden is colder than an
Speaker 2: impromptu meeting with your ex. And I should say filling
Speaker 2: in for me who I am filling in for James person,
Speaker 2: Happy birthday.
Speaker 3: Thank you very much, terbye, and it's great tonight by
Speaker 3: forty ninth, although not according to my mother who just
Speaker 3: messaged me wishing me a happy fifty year. Fantastic kind
Speaker 3: of figure. If anyone should know, it should be her.
Speaker 2: She's well, I know, but she's just getting in a
Speaker 2: year early. So so don't don't get involved in the efficiency.
Speaker 2: And of course Freili joints us as always on the program,
Speaker 2: plenty to get into and discuss with the biggest story
Speaker 2: in the world. Of course we'll get into all of
Speaker 2: that in a moment. We're too now for the US
Speaker 2: for Israel for a round in the papers, one state
Speaker 2: is backing down on its plan to ban you from
Speaker 2: having a gas hetera hooray. Will tell you where that
Speaker 2: is soon, and later in the program our Dope of
Speaker 2: the Day, I'll.
Speaker 1: Give you a little bit of a tip.
Speaker 2: If you're going to steal a car, perhaps don't fall
Speaker 2: asleep in it and let the coppers catch you in
Speaker 2: the vehicle now as we go to air tonight. The
Speaker 2: latest news we have out of Israel and Iran is
Speaker 2: that Israel has launched a number of attacks this evening
Speaker 2: on Iran. They've included the Evan Prison. They've also hit
Speaker 2: a number of other targets, including airports you can see
Speaker 2: on the screen. They're a statement from the IDF, this
Speaker 2: was two hours ago, saying that they've struck six regime
Speaker 2: airports across western, central, and eastern Iran during runways, underground hangars,
Speaker 2: refueling aircraft F fourteen, F five and AH one aircraft.
Speaker 2: That destroyed aircraft were meant to stop AIF jets. The
Speaker 2: AIF impaired takeoff capabilities from these airports, as well as
Speaker 2: the Iranian military's ability to operate its air force from them.
Speaker 2: And a statement we have just moments ago from Israel
Speaker 2: Defense Minister Israel Kat saying that the IDF is currently
Speaker 2: striking with unprecedented force. Says regime targets and governmental repression
Speaker 2: bodies in the heart of Tehran. They include the Bassis headquarters,
Speaker 2: the Evan Prison for political prisoners, which is in Tehran,
Speaker 2: an area of Tehran, and regime opponents. They've hit the
Speaker 2: destruction of israel klock in Palestine Square, which had been
Speaker 2: there since twenty seventeen, the internal security headquarters of the
Speaker 2: Revolutionary Guards, the ideology headquarters, and other regime targets. So
Speaker 2: if there's any more to tell you, we will as
Speaker 2: the night wears on. But that's the latest out of
Speaker 2: Israel and Iran, So of course no end to what
Speaker 2: is going on there, and plenty more to come, and
Speaker 2: that will be the question now is where do Iran
Speaker 2: go from here? Having now been attacked by the US
Speaker 2: in that extraordinary attack. Of course you saw yesterday one
Speaker 2: hundred and twenty five US aircraft involved in that bunker
Speaker 2: busting effort, hitting three nuclear enrichment sites. So for Iran
Speaker 2: they have to decide now how they react.
Speaker 1: In some way, they have to react.
Speaker 2: They have to retaliate, because of course it would be
Speaker 2: the end of the regime if they didn't retaliate in
Speaker 2: some ways, so they have to show some sign of strength.
Speaker 2: The question will be freyer though, what exactly do they
Speaker 2: hit and why? Because you've got the option perhaps of
Speaker 2: getting your mates who might be in the US, who
Speaker 2: terra cells, etc. To do something there or you could
Speaker 2: attack a US base in the Middle East, and there
Speaker 2: are many of them. I think we've got a map
Speaker 2: we can show you on the screen here. But if
Speaker 2: they do that, the US is going to respond hammer
Speaker 2: and tolls. So they're stuck between a rock and a.
Speaker 1: Hard place as to how they actually react to this.
Speaker 4: For sure, Iran definitely has to respond because the domestic
Speaker 4: pressure they're under to save the regime is profound. Also,
Speaker 4: the Ayatoler is eighty six years old, he's almost at
Speaker 4: the end of his life. Inherent in their ideology is
Speaker 4: a glorification of martyrdom and a willingness to die for
Speaker 4: the Islamic regime.
Speaker 2: That's the map, by the way, on screen of all
Speaker 2: the USA bases and military basis in the Middle East.
Speaker 4: So they need to do something. They want to do something.
Speaker 4: The Iyetoler has consistently said, and he compromise with the
Speaker 4: West is opening the door to moral decay and will
Speaker 4: ultimately weake in Iran. So I think it's not a
Speaker 4: question of whether they do something, it's about what they do.
Speaker 4: As you said, they have a few options they have
Speaker 4: After the head of the IIGC was assassinated by the
Speaker 4: US in twenty twenty. They did attempt a few high
Speaker 4: level assassinations on Mike Pompeo as one of the US
Speaker 4: officials they tried to target, but the US thwarted all
Speaker 4: of them, so I really do question them our ability
Speaker 4: to actually carry out such a high level assassination within
Speaker 4: the US. That seems less likely, although we have been
Speaker 4: warned of terracells being activated, so we'll see. In terms
Speaker 4: of the actions their proxies could take. Think Hamas Hezbla,
Speaker 4: the Hooties, I mean Hezblah. Half of them don't have eyes, legs.
Speaker 4: After the page Or incident, they're still severely weakened. They've
Speaker 4: been put on notice by Israel and by the Lebanese
Speaker 4: government as well not to get involved. Ha Maas is useless.
Speaker 4: They're completely caught up fighting Israel and the Hooties have
Speaker 4: They can launch missiles, but against the US's air defense systems,
Speaker 4: they're basically powerless, so I don't think their proxies will
Speaker 4: be much help. The last sort of option available to
Speaker 4: them is to shut off the Strait of Horn Moves.
Speaker 4: That would be obviously huge for the world. Twenty percent
Speaker 4: of our oil goes through there. But I don't know
Speaker 4: if that is going to have great consequences for them either.
Speaker 4: Because China is reliant for half of its oil coming
Speaker 4: from the Strait of Hormuz, China is a key backer
Speaker 4: of Iran. Iran would not want to get them offside,
Speaker 4: and what it would also do is probably realign Saudi
Speaker 4: Arabia and other Gulf countries closer with the West because
Speaker 4: they will see this as also hurting them. So when
Speaker 4: you look at the options available to Iran right now,
Speaker 4: basically every single one of them is a suicide mission
Speaker 4: in and of themselves, and that is kind of the
Speaker 4: position the regime is now in. They have no good options.
Speaker 4: They've been completely annihilated by a country eighty times smaller
Speaker 4: than them in the space of about seven days, and
Speaker 4: the world overestimated how powerful they were.
Speaker 5: Yeah, I think that's absolutely right.
Speaker 3: Iran is utterly, utterly, utterly friendless. Like in terms of,
Speaker 3: you know, the geopolitical kid in the playground, Iran is
Speaker 3: the bully who everybody hates and who someone has now
Speaker 3: finally stood up to, and they've been found to be
Speaker 3: absolutely weak.
Speaker 5: I think you're absolutely right. I was about saying myself
Speaker 5: and you nailed it.
Speaker 3: Saying that it's actually not a matter of what the rate,
Speaker 3: assuming that the regime wants to survive, I think is
Speaker 3: the wrong assumption.
Speaker 5: It's a matter of what.
Speaker 6: Sort of.
Speaker 3: Pain and damage and suffering is the regime capable of inflicting.
Speaker 3: Because this is an a scatological you know, this is
Speaker 3: a doomsday cult basically that's running around. It believes in
Speaker 3: a confrontation between you know, the prior and the infidels,
Speaker 3: and it wants that war. I mean, all that's been
Speaker 3: doing for its entire existence has been trying to provoke
Speaker 3: that war. It's now got it, and it basically wants
Speaker 3: to an excuse to unleash you know. And again there
Speaker 3: is no prospect for the regime I don't think, really surviving.
Speaker 5: In any meaningful way.
Speaker 3: That all its proxies are screwed harmas has done the
Speaker 3: ir c G has, the Iranian military, the Iranian Revolutionary Guard,
Speaker 3: all their leadership has been taken out, the head of
Speaker 3: intelligence has been taken out, all their air and missile capabilities,
Speaker 3: it seems pretty much have been severely crippled, their nuclear capability.
Speaker 3: If we're to believe the US, and there's no real
Speaker 3: reason why you wouldn't. Has been completely destroyed, and everybody
Speaker 3: hates them, including that all their neighbors and their own people.
Speaker 3: I mean, this has had an Arabic leadership that rules
Speaker 3: over a Persian population with the most oppressive I mean
Speaker 3: the last thing Aaran did in relation to its restrictions
Speaker 3: on women was just last year. It ratcheted them up.
Speaker 3: It's not like it's just old fashioned. It's stone age
Speaker 3: and it's staying there. It is stone age, and it
Speaker 3: is trying to get further back into the primordial swamp
Speaker 3: from where these people came from. So its own neighbors
Speaker 3: will turn on it at the slightest provocation, its own
Speaker 3: people will turn on it in the slightest provocation. It
Speaker 3: has the two smartest and biggest military forces respectively going
Speaker 3: after it in the form of Israel and the US.
Speaker 5: And it's the only thing you could possibly.
Speaker 3: Call an ally either the terrorist groups that it is
Speaker 3: the source of funding. So without Iran Hezbla and Amasa
Speaker 3: Evan Moore weaken or Russia, which is in the middle
Speaker 3: of suffering in the same way that Iran is from
Speaker 3: the same types of methods, from a smarter, more agile,
Speaker 3: and more technologically advanced opponent, and as a result of that,
Speaker 3: Russia has no capacity to help out Iran. It's only
Speaker 3: other ally, it was Syria who's as the other sads
Speaker 3: just ended up in the sort of Colonel Gaddafies kind
Speaker 3: of situation, except I think they escape without this sort
Speaker 3: of the bayonet up the backside?
Speaker 5: So where is where is Iran? And the other thing, sorry,
Speaker 5: one other thing. They say they're going to unleash this.
Speaker 3: Reign of this wave of terror in response with what
Speaker 3: literally you and what I mean? All the terrorists Asunnis Isis,
Speaker 3: al Kaeder, jamais Lamia, Boko Haram, all these extremist terror
Speaker 3: at work.
Speaker 5: They're all shoot is the only thing they hate more
Speaker 5: than the West?
Speaker 1: Is there? Yeah? So the only people that could use
Speaker 1: are the people like the hoodies that they fund, right
Speaker 1: and you mentioned there.
Speaker 2: Of course, the US is that they have destroyed their
Speaker 2: nuclear capabilities. It was interesting that the International Atomic Energy
Speaker 2: Agency said that there was no evidence of increased radiation
Speaker 2: at the sites that had been hit.
Speaker 1: They may well, we don't know. They may well.
Speaker 2: That is, Iran have removed some equipment and capabilities from
Speaker 2: those sites before they were struck. But even if that
Speaker 2: were the case, it certainly makes their job a lot
Speaker 2: more difficult now to create a nuclear bomb. So the
Speaker 2: question will become, do you now go health leather and
Speaker 2: destroy everything or do you basically keep them at bay?
Speaker 2: I mean, this was an effort to keep them at bay.
Speaker 2: You could do that at four month intervals probably and
Speaker 2: just keep going down this line general Jack Keane, of
Speaker 2: course you will see every week here on the Bolt Report.
Speaker 2: He was on Fox News overnight US time about one
Speaker 2: pm today Australian time, talking about how Iran may react
Speaker 2: and what implication that might have for regime change.
Speaker 1: Take a look.
Speaker 6: They're not easy options to deal with, and certainly the
Speaker 6: regime survival may very well depend on the option they select.
Speaker 6: So I think that the first option is he'd look
Speaker 6: at would be a symbolic strike and done for political
Speaker 6: reasons domestic audience, to convince people that they are there
Speaker 6: is some retribution, they're taking action, and therefore hopefully avoid
Speaker 6: being politically weakened internally where they would be susceptible to
Speaker 6: an overthrow, likely by hardliners who would be actually more
Speaker 6: hardline than the Iottal, which is kind of hard to
Speaker 6: get your head around because the iototal is about as
Speaker 6: hardline diabolical as you can find. But that would be one.
Speaker 2: Let's bring in yer Old Steinberg, Professor of Politics at
Speaker 2: Barolin University in Israel. Professor, thank you for joining us.
Speaker 2: So the question now of a regime change, and the
Speaker 2: point that General Kane raises there is that if you
Speaker 2: do change the regime, you could end up with something
Speaker 2: even worse.
Speaker 1: What's your tech.
Speaker 7: Well, first of all, we're in new, uncharted territory. This
Speaker 7: regime has been in charge of Iran for over forty
Speaker 7: five years. It's been a regime of hell, a regime
Speaker 7: of terror. They built this ring of fire that said arc.
Speaker 7: Your guests before talked about that. That's all gone now
Speaker 7: and they really don't know what to do. It's hard
Speaker 7: to predict where they're going to go or how they're
Speaker 7: going to react. If they are willing to risk the
Speaker 7: regime completely, they may lash out, but there are alternatives.
Speaker 7: I'm less pessimistic than the way you put it, in
Speaker 7: the way a.
Speaker 8: Lot of people do, because that's really if you say
Speaker 8: that there's a chance of a worse regime coming up,
Speaker 8: you do nothing, and then you don't open up the
Speaker 8: opportunity for a much better system, a system that has
Speaker 8: some degree of freedom.
Speaker 7: Iran as a different country than we're used to dealing
Speaker 7: with in the Arab at least they're not Arabs. They
Speaker 7: do have something called civil society. They have protest movements.
Speaker 7: Those protest movements brought tenser even hundreds of thousands of
Speaker 7: people out in the streets every few years, every time
Speaker 7: the regime steals an election, every time they very visibly harassed,
Speaker 7: and worse the harass, they mistreat and they execute women.
Speaker 7: So you see that there's a for a long time
Speaker 7: been building an anti regime group with any ran large
Speaker 7: population that wants to see them gone. How that translates
Speaker 7: into a new and different political process is difficult to predict.
Speaker 7: The overthrow of the Shah was you could see towards
Speaker 7: the end of his regime that it was fading that
Speaker 7: he and his regime didn't have the power to maintain
Speaker 7: their ability to stay in office. But nobody predicted, at
Speaker 7: least nobody that I know, predicted that has become a
Speaker 7: radical Islamic, fanatic, jihadrist regime that we saw that would
Speaker 7: spend all this money trying to get nuclear weapons and
Speaker 7: build thousands of missiles and continually attack a zerone threat
Speaker 7: and to attack the United States. So where this goes
Speaker 7: from here is very hard to predict. But I think
Speaker 7: my general approach to these sorts of situations is let's
Speaker 7: see what we can do, and mainly what the Iranian
Speaker 7: people can do to rid themselves of this very horrible
Speaker 7: group of leaders, and let's try to develop a situation
Speaker 7: to help those people to come up with something that's better.
Speaker 7: We may be seeing something similar that's happening in Syria
Speaker 7: that may be a better example. Libya, of course, is
Speaker 7: a worse example, at least not a good example.
Speaker 4: Hey, this is Fraya, thank you so much for joining us.
Speaker 4: We just saw Iran's foreign minister go in for a
Speaker 4: meeting with Putin in the last couple of hours, and
Speaker 4: the Kremlin have said essentially that they'll provide Iran with
Speaker 4: support as they need. It very vague about exactly what
Speaker 4: Russia will do to support Iran. Clearly, Iran doesn't look
Speaker 4: like they're winning this war, So how do you think
Speaker 4: Russia is going to respond and what kind of support
Speaker 4: do you think Russia will be providing Iran other than
Speaker 4: just condemnations of Israel and America.
Speaker 7: Well, I'll start with a flipping comment that Russia and
Speaker 7: Putin could easily provide asylum for the regime the foreign
Speaker 7: minister the I Toola, as he did for the Syrian
Speaker 7: Prasad and his entourage not too long ago. That's a possibility.
Speaker 7: But Russia really is a very weak power right now,
Speaker 7: and you discussed that earlier on the panel. They really
Speaker 7: don't have a lot to be able to offer. They're
Speaker 7: up to their ears. They can't win in Ukraine. They
Speaker 7: thought they'd have a walk off in Ukraine a couple
Speaker 7: of years ago when they invaded. They're using Iranian weapons.
Speaker 7: They're one of their main weapons that they use is
Speaker 7: to tack with the Iranian made drones. That means they
Speaker 7: can't even make their own drones, and the Iranian drones
Speaker 7: are being shot down by the Israelis, and that capability,
Speaker 7: that technology will be transferred to Ukraine as well. It
Speaker 7: will be easier for Ukraine to shoot down Russian drones
Speaker 7: and other equipment. So there's very little Russian offer. They
Speaker 7: don't have money to offer, really, they don't have any
Speaker 7: kind of political framework they can veto resolutions in the
Speaker 7: UN big deal that's not going to help save the
Speaker 7: regime or prevent further attacks. We've got a situation now
Speaker 7: where the Israeli Air Force is flying at will over
Speaker 7: all of Iran, not just the western part closer to Israel,
Speaker 7: but also the eastern part.
Speaker 5: It's like a duck shoot.
Speaker 7: They're knocking off, piece by piece all of the military assets,
Speaker 7: all of security assets the Uranians have. So going to
Speaker 7: Russia is more of a symbolic act. Well, I can't
Speaker 7: go anyplace else nobody else wants us. I'll go to
Speaker 7: Russia and I'll pretend like it was twenty years ago,
Speaker 7: and then the Allies could get together. They have the
Speaker 7: Americans supporting the Israelis, and you have Russia and maybe
Speaker 7: China supporting the Arab.
Speaker 5: States or in this case Iran.
Speaker 7: That's where we are. But I don't think it's anything
Speaker 7: more than symbolic.
Speaker 3: Gerald Joe here, thank you also for joining US. I
Speaker 3: wonder if, obviously that much desirable resolution to this would
Speaker 3: be regime changed from the bottom up, where a more benign,
Speaker 3: more pro democratic liberal authority took the place of the
Speaker 3: eye tooler and the president. We saw in two thousand
Speaker 3: and nine the Green Revolution in Iran that sort of
Speaker 3: presaged the Arab spring elsewhere, and yet those movements often
Speaker 3: started with students, with democrats, with liberally minded young people,
Speaker 3: and were very quickly overrun by extremists, by ISIS and
Speaker 3: ISIS linked militants. That's obviously the fear that we heard
Speaker 3: voice previously by Jack Keane. What do you think, how
Speaker 3: can the local movements in Iran prevent that power flowing
Speaker 3: to whoever is prepared to use it most extremely Before
Speaker 3: we get to that, there's.
Speaker 7: What I say is probably a more likely, unfortunately scenario,
Speaker 7: and that is the regime holds on by its fingernails.
Speaker 7: It holds on through greater repression, and it continues as
Speaker 7: war of attrition. Of sending a missile or two over
Speaker 7: to Israel every couple of maybe once or twice a day,
Speaker 7: which sends israeli Is running into shelters, doesn't do very
Speaker 7: much damage, if any, today, but they continue to have
Speaker 7: this ability of threatening of terror, and that also perhaps
Speaker 7: using their terror cells abroad, attacking soft targets abroad, maybe
Speaker 7: part of this war of attrition. So I'm more concerned
Speaker 7: about the regime hanging on and trying to at least
Speaker 7: rehabilitate itself by showing that it can strike out as
Speaker 7: opposed to a regime change, which were obviously much better
Speaker 7: for the Iranian people for the region. I think what
Speaker 7: the outside rule can do some to support the Iranian dissonance,
Speaker 7: and they really hasn't done enough. I think during the
Speaker 7: two thousand and nine period you mentioned, the American government
Speaker 7: did not really offer very much. The West, the freedom
Speaker 7: loving democratic countries in the West, didn't really do much
Speaker 7: more than verbal support for the Iranian dissidents who are
Speaker 7: out there trying to overthrow the regime and get their
Speaker 7: freedom back.
Speaker 5: That has to change.
Speaker 7: There has to be some sort of a plan, I
Speaker 7: would say the discussion among Western democracies that have a
Speaker 7: little bit of a backbone, you're going to have to
Speaker 7: work with Trump. You don't like Trump, that's too bad,
Speaker 7: I'm not saying it to you. But governments, including the
Speaker 7: Australian government that's the only show in town Europe clearly
Speaker 7: is incapable of doing anything, and they'd have to do
Speaker 7: a lot of changes to become involved. And there it
Speaker 7: has to be done thoughtful, carefully, because too much overt
Speaker 7: external help it delegitimizes the internal forces against the regime.
Speaker 7: So it's got to be a very very careful balance
Speaker 7: walking across this bridge. I think it doesn't make too
Speaker 7: much sense to try to predict how that's going to go,
Speaker 7: just like nobody can predict the French Revolution, the Russian Revolution,
Speaker 7: and what's happened in other parts of the world. Libya,
Speaker 7: all those things. We had the Arab Spring Libya over
Speaker 7: through Kadafi and it's a total chaos. Most of the
Speaker 7: other as you said, most of the other Apps Spring
Speaker 7: movements were squashed by the powers that.
Speaker 5: Be, by the more regime based.
Speaker 7: Tyrants that wanted to prevent any kind of change in
Speaker 7: the power of the elites control of these countries. And
Speaker 7: that might be the case in the round, So it's
Speaker 7: going to be very difficult.
Speaker 2: Gerald Steinberg, thank you so much for joining us tonight
Speaker 2: and thank you for your instruits. It has been excellent
Speaker 2: to have you Professor of politics at Bailan University.
Speaker 1: Of course, when we talk.
Speaker 2: About regime changer, I think he's right that the only
Speaker 2: way you can achieve genuine regime change is if it
Speaker 2: comes from the Iranian people. We've seen so many times
Speaker 2: what has happened when the US in particular is going
Speaker 2: to say the West, but led by the US, IS
Speaker 2: has marched into the Middle East and tried to tell
Speaker 2: them how they should run their countries, and it doesn't work.
Speaker 2: This has to come from the Iranian people. What is
Speaker 2: interesting to see though, was overnight a some quite large
Speaker 2: rallies around in support of the regime. And I wonder
Speaker 2: how much of this isn't necessarily people who really support
Speaker 2: the regime. But even if they don't support the regime,
Speaker 2: they don't like their country being bombed, they don't like
Speaker 2: being told what to do, and for some reason or another,
Speaker 2: in a time of crisis, they will at least back
Speaker 2: what is in front of them, rather than saying someone
Speaker 2: else can come in and take John. You can see
Speaker 2: pictures on the screen here of some of these protests overnight.
Speaker 2: So how much of a problem do you think is
Speaker 2: it freyer that there could be people in the Middle
Speaker 2: as it were, who.
Speaker 1: Are straying more to the side of the regime after.
Speaker 4: This, Well, there will definitely be some in Iran who say,
Speaker 4: we don't like the regime, but we also don't like
Speaker 4: regime change through bombs. This is more civilian death, more casualties. Also,
Speaker 4: the difference between Iran and Israel is Iran doesn't have
Speaker 4: bomb shelters in every home, so you are more exposed there.
Speaker 4: But then again, Israel isn't striking civilian areas, so you know,
Speaker 4: they're very different. But I would say the polling that
Speaker 4: I've seen shows that seventy percent of Iranians under the
Speaker 4: age of thirty five do not support the regime. And
Speaker 4: the problem has been every time there has been an
Speaker 4: attempt to overthrow the regime, brutal repression from the IRGC,
Speaker 4: which essentially run the government at this point, has shut
Speaker 4: it down. So I guess the question is, if there
Speaker 4: was to be a successful internal overthrow of the I tollers,
Speaker 4: it would have to come alongside the dismantling of the IRGC.
Speaker 4: And I think that's why you're starting to see Israel
Speaker 4: go after the IRGC headquarters, go after key government buildings,
Speaker 4: because they know the only path to sustainable peace is
Speaker 4: one where you do not have people determined to annihilate
Speaker 4: you running the country.
Speaker 5: That's exactly right. And it's interesting.
Speaker 3: I mean, you say, oh, how legitimate are theys pro
Speaker 3: regime protests? Well, they're risking nothing, are they. I mean,
Speaker 3: they're not out there everything their life. And yet you
Speaker 3: had in you know, in the wake of the election
Speaker 3: into the election, it was completely read election, and they
Speaker 3: have them where you have people like low involved, but
Speaker 3: you have people coming out no where that there is
Speaker 3: every chance that they would be taken, tortured and executed
Speaker 3: as a result of their involvement. You still have women
Speaker 3: rising up against the oppression that they are constantly facing
Speaker 3: there and you know, refusing to wear the burk or whatever,
Speaker 3: knowing that they could be taken and in prison, taken
Speaker 3: away from their families, taken away from their children, and
Speaker 3: tortured and killed.
Speaker 5: And yet they're still out there.
Speaker 6: Now.
Speaker 3: That tells you where the real support is. And the
Speaker 3: other thing is that unlike in a lot of these
Speaker 3: other states that were drawn up arbitrarily after World War One,
Speaker 3: Iran has a central coherent and Gerald sort of kind
Speaker 3: of made this point. I think a central coherent majority
Speaker 3: that all share the same culture, that all share the
Speaker 3: same history. Iran is basically Persia, but it is now
Speaker 3: Persia under the yoke of a hardcore Islamist Arab minority.
Speaker 3: That everyone who loves Iran, loves its history, loves its heritage, hates.
Speaker 2: Indeed, and these other people who will need to rise
Speaker 2: up if there is to be regime change in Iran.
Speaker 2: Of course, Sir Donald Trump signaled online today on his
Speaker 2: Truth social platform that he would.
Speaker 1: Support regime change.
Speaker 2: He posted, it's not politically correct to use the term
Speaker 2: regime change, but if the current Iranian regime is unable
Speaker 2: to make Iran great again, why wouldn't there be a
Speaker 2: regime change? Nigga to go with Magreb. He'll be making
Speaker 2: the hats and selling them very soon. Should note that
Speaker 2: that is slightly different to what other people had been
Speaker 2: saying throughout the day, including his vice president JD.
Speaker 1: Vance.
Speaker 2: But it's not as though Trump is saying I'm going
Speaker 2: to go in and change the regime.
Speaker 1: We should be very clear about that.
Speaker 2: He's giving his tacit support to the idea of doing so,
Speaker 2: which I think is good. And I also want to
Speaker 2: note before we move on, I thought the best front
Speaker 2: page I saw out of all of the coverage was
Speaker 2: from The Sun in the UK, which was stick it
Speaker 2: up Your Bunker, which comes back to the front page
Speaker 2: they had bag in the fall, Glynn's war stick it
Speaker 2: Up Your Junta. So good to see a revival of
Speaker 2: some great tabloid judis there in the United.
Speaker 5: Kingdom with quality journal Let let's bring.
Speaker 1: It back home.
Speaker 2: We had to wait basically twenty four hours to see
Speaker 2: any kind of response out of the government.
Speaker 1: We saw a statement yesterday from a government spokesman.
Speaker 2: But I mean, you'd like to see the Foreign Minister
Speaker 2: or the Fence Minister or the Prime Minister get up
Speaker 2: and say something yesterday will know we waited for a
Speaker 2: press conference today.
Speaker 1: Here was Anthony Albanezi, the Prime Minister, being asked today
Speaker 1: why it took him so long?
Speaker 3: Did it take twenty four hours for Australia Express express
Speaker 3: unequivocal support.
Speaker 1: For this action by its Closis Dale?
Speaker 3: What does this say about our relationship with the US
Speaker 3: under your government?
Speaker 2: We issued a statement, yes, sir, oh you did good.
Speaker 2: The rest of us missed it. I mean, seriously, we
Speaker 2: issued a statement yesterday. It's all been well to have
Speaker 2: her government spokes come out and say something. Why Joe
Speaker 2: did we not hear from your great mate the Prime
Speaker 2: Minister yesterday.
Speaker 3: I think Albo is an inherently cautious man. He is
Speaker 3: inherently and in a good way, like he's someone who
Speaker 3: likes to sort of get a read of where and
Speaker 3: if you look at the way the government has done
Speaker 3: policy development in the past, often sending my blood pressure
Speaker 3: through the roof. But you know, they've often let things
Speaker 3: sort of and you know, again, this isn't a new
Speaker 3: tax reform, but you know, the sort of let to
Speaker 3: see where the dust settles before making it clear. I
Speaker 3: obviously would have liked to have seen them come out
Speaker 3: completely in support of the US immediately. This is the
Speaker 3: first time in my life I've ever called for a
Speaker 3: bombing raid. I said that this is something that Donald
Speaker 3: Trump needed to do, and I think he was right
Speaker 3: to do it. It's probably no secret that there are
Speaker 3: those on the left for whom anything Donald Trump does
Speaker 3: is toxic and they will just be against whoever that
Speaker 3: would just be for whoever Donald Trump is.
Speaker 5: Again, so you have this bizarre.
Speaker 3: Scenario, got lefties who are all the way with the
Speaker 3: Ayatoller and Vladimir Putin because they hate Trump so much.
Speaker 3: Some of those, I suppose he's got a sort of
Speaker 3: drag with him, so it's not as easy for him
Speaker 3: as it is for a you know, Peter Dutton or
Speaker 3: Scott Morrison or whatever to just come out and say
Speaker 3: all the way with LBJ, all the way with DJT,
Speaker 3: but I can absolutely assure you that Australia is privately,
Speaker 3: you know, the government is one hundred percent lockstep in
Speaker 3: with the US. It couldn't afford not to be either.
Speaker 3: Why but it is one hundred percent or for it.
Speaker 3: But but yes, it uses cautious language.
Speaker 4: You say he's being cautious. I would say that's a weakness.
Speaker 4: I would say that's a complete lack of leadership and
Speaker 4: inability to see right from wrong. Like I don't understand
Speaker 4: how it's that hard. And in fact, the statement the
Speaker 4: government released yesterday did not explicitly say whether the Australian
Speaker 4: government supported the US strikes. Was very vague, and Penny
Speaker 4: Wong was questioned about this at the press conference today.
Speaker 4: Check it out.
Speaker 9: Sostronia has been clear, along with the international community that
Speaker 9: Iran cannot be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon. We
Speaker 9: support action to prevent that from occurring, and.
Speaker 7: This is what this is.
Speaker 4: So finally she said, we support action that stops that,
Speaker 4: and that is what this is. Like they can't even
Speaker 4: bring themselves to out and out just say yes, we
Speaker 4: support America taking out one of the most dangerous regimes
Speaker 4: in the world, with the world's most dangerous weapons. This
Speaker 4: is probably the easiest foreign policy decision they've had to
Speaker 4: make over the last three years that they've been in government.
Speaker 4: I don't get how it's that high.
Speaker 2: Well, they needed the talking points to get this message
Speaker 2: across too. Let's just play that again.
Speaker 1: This is Penny Wong earlier today talking about it. Saw
Speaker 1: the clip. I'll show you again.
Speaker 9: Sostronia has been clear, along with the international community, that
Speaker 9: Iran can not be allowed to develop a nuclear weapon.
Speaker 9: We support action to prevent that from occurring. And this
Speaker 9: is what this is.
Speaker 1: And now with a slightly deeper voice.
Speaker 10: The world has long agreed that Iran cannot be allowed
Speaker 10: to get a nuclear weapon, and we support action to prevent.
Speaker 1: That, and that is what this is.
Speaker 2: Like, I know they said the talking points around in
Speaker 2: the morning, but surely you should be able to speak
Speaker 2: to this stuff from the heart without having to say
Speaker 2: exactly the same thing in exactly the same words that
Speaker 2: was clearly written by someone in the government.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and look again, I think what you find is,
Speaker 3: you know, and again with Alba, and obviously everyone knows
Speaker 3: I'm a bit partial to him, but he always he
Speaker 3: always gets to the to the right position. He always
Speaker 3: gets to the right decision.
Speaker 5: It's just that.
Speaker 3: Sometimes it's not as fast or as furious as people
Speaker 3: would like.
Speaker 5: And yes, I think there is. There is a difference.
Speaker 3: Often you can see with those kind of statements that
Speaker 3: you have to kind of read them through times to
Speaker 3: actually figure out what they're trying to say. You do
Speaker 3: see that a lot more on the kind of left
Speaker 3: side of politics and the sort of left of the
Speaker 3: Labor Party then you would say in a response from
Speaker 3: someone like a you know, I imagine Paul Keating saying
Speaker 3: something like that, or Bob Hawk or Chris Min's or
Speaker 3: Peter Malanowska. So there is just a difference in time,
Speaker 3: but in terms of the actual decision making and the stance,
Speaker 3: Albo is exactly where he and Australia need to be.
Speaker 2: Because one thing we know is that Australia didn't where
Speaker 2: we assume we know because they weren't tell us if
Speaker 2: it actually happened or not. But Australia didn't get a
Speaker 2: heads up that this was going to happen. Someone who
Speaker 2: did get a heads up though, was the United Kingdom
Speaker 2: their Prime minister. So King Starmer made some statements the
Speaker 2: other day on Sky UK and he was caught on
Speaker 2: the hop about them.
Speaker 1: Have a look.
Speaker 11: Tuesday morning, you said how important the excavation was. This
Speaker 11: was at the G seven. You told me you didn't
Speaker 11: think US tackle was imminent. You sat next to President
Speaker 11: Trump at the G seven dinner of leaders. You said,
Speaker 11: nothing the President said suggests he's about to get involved
Speaker 11: in this conflict. On the contrary, here we are. He
Speaker 11: has struck Iran. He's done exactly the opposite of what
Speaker 11: you said you thought he was going to do. Do
Speaker 11: you feel foolish, frustrated that he's not listening.
Speaker 12: Well, it's clearly a fast moving situation, and there's been
Speaker 12: a huge amount of discussions in the days since the
Speaker 12: G seven ended, and the US has now taken the
Speaker 12: action to alleviate the threat that Run's.
Speaker 5: Nuclear program poses. My position throughout.
Speaker 12: Has been as a calling for de escalation.
Speaker 2: Oh dear, you had no idea and you got caught out.
Speaker 2: I think we know, well, perhaps we can feel a
Speaker 2: little bit bitter about ourselves. We thought we were doing badly,
Speaker 2: but the UK didn't really know what was going on either.
Speaker 2: I tell you what, the US must be quaking in
Speaker 2: its boots though, because they've just had message from North Korea.
Speaker 1: They have condemned the attacks on and you.
Speaker 2: Know, when North Korea is telling you that it's bad,
Speaker 2: that it must be terrible. And we know that Donald
Speaker 2: Trump was a great mates with Kim Jong and his
Speaker 2: last presidency, it seems there might be a crack in
Speaker 2: the bromance these days. Well, we're talking about North Korea.
Speaker 2: We know another country that they've been involved with recently
Speaker 2: is Russia. And we're talking earlier about the fact that
Speaker 2: Russia has met with Iran's foreign minister tonight, letting me
Speaker 2: a putin. You've seen the pictures of them meeting to
Speaker 2: talk about how they might be able to support in future.
Speaker 1: Of course, Iran and Russia do.
Speaker 2: Have an agreement, but it's not one that forces Russia
Speaker 2: to actually do anything for them, And to be honest,
Speaker 2: there's no reason that Russia would want to get too
Speaker 2: closely involved in this. Of course, as we talked about earlier,
Speaker 2: they were to war on their own front at the moment,
Speaker 2: which has depleted their resources. But if they want to
Speaker 2: potentially get to some kind of CEA agreement that would
Speaker 2: end the war, that would potentially be advantageous to what
Speaker 2: Russia wants in their situation. The last thing they want
Speaker 2: to be doing is annoying the US on this matter exactly.
Speaker 4: And that was the interesting timing. We saw the US
Speaker 4: bombed Iran's nuclear facilities and then hours later Russia was tweeting,
Speaker 4: we are now ready to resume talks about Ukraine and
Speaker 4: we will negotiate this conflict with Iran. So clearly they're nervous,
Speaker 4: and I think what the strikes on the nuclear reactors
Speaker 4: did was re established the US's deterrence. There was this
Speaker 4: sentiment that that Trump is all talk. The reason people
Speaker 4: were scared of him is because you can never predict
Speaker 4: what he could do, but he hadn't actually done that
Speaker 4: much in his first six months as president. He said
Speaker 4: when by the time of his inauguration, if all the
Speaker 4: hostages weren't returned, they would be hell unleashed on Gaza.
Speaker 4: That obviously didn't happen. He said he would revamp Gaza
Speaker 4: turn into Gaza Lago. That also did not happen. And
Speaker 4: so there was a growing sense is this guy going
Speaker 4: to do anything? Maybe we can take him for granted,
Speaker 4: And that's what Russia is doing, prolonging these piece talks
Speaker 4: with Ukraine and eventually annoying Trump as a result. So
Speaker 4: I think now they're starting to backtrack a little bit
Speaker 4: and go, oh, okay, America actually means business. But again,
Speaker 4: what material support can Russia actually provide? Right now? They're
Speaker 4: in the fourth year of their three day special operation
Speaker 4: in Ukraine, the fourth year in a country that is
Speaker 4: not even a third rate world power, and they are
Speaker 4: supposedly the rival superpower to the United States. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 1: It's interesting as well.
Speaker 2: Over the week in before this attack had been carried out,
Speaker 2: Putin was speaking in Petersburg and he was asked at
Speaker 2: the conference there specifically, you know, what involvement might Russia
Speaker 2: have with Iran and etc. And he made a very
Speaker 2: interesting comment, I thought, pointing out that fifteen percent of
Speaker 2: the population of Israel is either Russia nor from the
Speaker 2: former Soviet nations, and that he takes this into account
Speaker 2: and always has taken this into account in the.
Speaker 1: Decisions that he makes.
Speaker 2: So even before this attack happened, he was signaling on
Speaker 2: the weekend that he didn't really want to get involved.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's absolutely right.
Speaker 3: And again, as I say, like, Iran is utterly friendless
Speaker 3: when all your allies or quasi allies, evil thugs, who
Speaker 3: are only concerned for their own self enrichment and self preservation.
Speaker 3: Then there's not much to rely on, is there, especially
Speaker 3: when your chips are down. The Iran Russia Alliance and
Speaker 3: its latest incarnation was basically forged in response to ISIS
Speaker 3: in Syria, and it was a convenient kind of arrangement
Speaker 3: for the West, which didn't want to side with Bashir
Speaker 3: al Asad but also didn't want to side with ISIS
Speaker 3: that had become the main force fighting against Asad. And
Speaker 3: then Assyria, of course has collapsed, and so Russia and
Speaker 3: Urana kind of united by a link that no longer exists.
Speaker 3: And again, Russia's got its own problems anyway, It probably
Speaker 3: wouldn't intervene militarily even if it wasn't knee deep in
Speaker 3: blood in Ukraine. And where else are these guys going
Speaker 3: to turn to? It is just, you know, these guys
Speaker 3: are just the worst people in the world. Man, You're
Speaker 3: the worst people in the world. Hanging out with the
Speaker 3: worst people in the world. Chances are they're not going
Speaker 3: to come to right. And as for all the criticism
Speaker 3: about Trump not telling other countries or not seeking permission
Speaker 3: from Congress, what.
Speaker 5: Part of surprise attack, don't you understand?
Speaker 2: Well, And it's interesting you mentioned asking Congress, because of
Speaker 2: course that's always been a sticking point in every other
Speaker 2: one of these situations happening, including when the Democratic presidents
Speaker 2: have done them.
Speaker 1: And then all of a sudden you've got the Dems
Speaker 1: jumping up, up and down. Now it saying, how dare
Speaker 1: trumb not adhere to the constitution?
Speaker 5: That's hey, guys, I'm going to bother runs new.
Speaker 1: Do Obama do in Libya? Things?
Speaker 4: Well, the Western leftists are Iran's only friends now, wrote
Speaker 4: a great column about this today. Absolutely wit Where do
Speaker 4: we see the most support for Iran outside of the
Speaker 4: paid protesters with an Iran on the streets of Western
Speaker 4: countries here in Sydney in the US. And it's pretty depressing,
Speaker 4: but it makes sense. They hate Trump, they hate the
Speaker 4: West so much that now they've found themselves on the
Speaker 4: side of an anti women, anti LGBTQ. Forget about your
Speaker 4: abortion rights, your trans rights. Women can't even show their
Speaker 4: hair in Iran. Yet they're good enough for the Western
Speaker 4: leftists to support.
Speaker 2: Yeah, well, there's scarcely a Muslim the liftless doesn't like.
Speaker 2: After the yeah break, sorry, we'll get into the papers
Speaker 2: some of the other news of the day, including one
Speaker 2: state that was planning to.
Speaker 1: Take your gas heat awab. You're not going to do
Speaker 1: it anymore.
Speaker 2: We'll tell you why, athletes, before we get into the papers.
Speaker 2: The US Embassy in Qatar has sent an email to
Speaker 2: American residents in Qatar telling them to shelter in place.
Speaker 2: It says it's out of an abundance of caution and
Speaker 2: gives no further information. So if we have any further information,
Speaker 2: we will tell you. But a rather ominous warning from
Speaker 2: the US Embassy to US residents in Guitar to shelter
Speaker 2: in place on those matters on the front of the
Speaker 2: Daily Telegraph tomorrow, it's his day. Late Albanzi undermines our
Speaker 2: standing on the world stage, sees experts down under and
Speaker 2: out what a good headline and an even better headline
Speaker 2: on the front of the Australian Tomorrow PM backs blast
Speaker 2: from the past. Anthony Albanzi has belatedly expressed support for
Speaker 2: Donald trump strikes on Iran's nuclear program, while distancing his
Speaker 2: government from the unilateral action by the nation's closest ally
Speaker 2: amid growing concerns Australia's influence in Washington is diminishing under labor.
Speaker 2: The Prime Minister in his Foreign minister, Pennywong front of
Speaker 2: the media on Monday morning, more than twenty four hours
Speaker 2: after the US attack, saying they had backed the US
Speaker 2: strikes but did not want to see the conflict escalate
Speaker 2: into a full scale war, which is a statement of
Speaker 2: the bleeding obvious, isn't it, Joe, And I think anyone
Speaker 2: wants to see it turn into a full scale war.
Speaker 2: But once again they're kind of talking out of both
Speaker 2: sides of their mouth.
Speaker 3: Well, I think again, I think they are stating the
Speaker 3: bleeding obvious that we support the US and hopefully it
Speaker 3: will not go any further than Iran's nuclear capability is
Speaker 3: being utterly annihilated and the regime falling, hopefully organically. So
Speaker 3: if anything, they've wrapped it up in a bit of
Speaker 3: red tape, Kayla.
Speaker 1: But I do think I'll get to that. I'll get
Speaker 1: to the red tape in a second.
Speaker 4: One quick thing here, Alban Easy is desperately stalking Donald
Speaker 4: Trump around the world, begging for a meeting with him.
Speaker 4: This could have been his opportunity to get back in
Speaker 4: the US's good graces by supporting them, coming in behind
Speaker 4: them around these strikes on Iran, and I think he's
Speaker 4: missed an incredible opportunity to start rebuilding some of our
Speaker 4: damage relationship with the US.
Speaker 2: Well, it does say on the front of the Odds
Speaker 2: Tomorrow that the US drop fourteen bunker buster bombs in
Speaker 2: twenty minutes. The PM dropped five unilateral action bombs some
Speaker 2: time and forty sevens ranging in eleven thirty seven am
Speaker 2: and thirty one seconds Throe to eleven forty one am
Speaker 2: and eighteen seconds. Another story on the front of the
Speaker 2: Odds Tomorrow, Labour's five thousand red tape rules. There were
Speaker 2: more than five thousand regulations added under the Albanzi government's
Speaker 2: first term, with the coalition accusing Labour of being disingenuous
Speaker 2: in its post election push to cut red tape, with
Speaker 2: Antony Albanesi and Jim Chalmers declaring cuts to red tape
Speaker 2: would be odd at the upcoming Productivity round table. Parliamentary
Speaker 2: Library analysis showed that there were nine hundred and fifty
Speaker 2: eight regulations enacted in the Health, Age, Care and Disability
Speaker 2: Portfolio and eight hundred and ninety one in Treasury since
Speaker 2: Labor was elected in twenty twenty two. It then goes
Speaker 2: on six hundred and forty six in the Department of Infrastructure,
Speaker 2: trainor Regional Development, Communications, Sports and the Arts, six hundred
Speaker 2: and thirty eight in Climate Change, Energy and Water, one
Speaker 2: hundred and fifty three in Employment and Workplace Relations, one.
Speaker 1: Hundred and ninety nine in agriculture. What do we need
Speaker 1: all these for? Jo?
Speaker 5: Yeah, look, I think I mean some of them.
Speaker 3: Obviously, you would need them because every time you have
Speaker 3: a new piece of legislation you would have a set
Speaker 3: of regulations to go with it. But there used to
Speaker 3: be a rule of thumb I think in a previous
Speaker 3: government where for every regulation that you implemented, you had
Speaker 3: to make sure you found one to cut. And I
Speaker 3: think that's a pretty good rule of thumb. It's a
Speaker 3: bit like the poke machine rules in New South Wales
Speaker 3: I think a little while ago anyway, where if you
Speaker 3: wanted to buy two poker machines you had to sell three.
Speaker 5: Yes, So no, I like that.
Speaker 2: I like for everyone in your past, you got to
Speaker 2: go through the one because and there's so much stuff
Speaker 2: on the books. I know Peter Phelps did when he
Speaker 2: went into state politics in New South Wales.
Speaker 1: Former Liberal Upper House.
Speaker 2: Member he went through literally everything and went back and
Speaker 2: found sta about railways going back to the nineteen twenties
Speaker 2: and thirties that were no longer pertinent.
Speaker 1: And there's so much stuff on the books that really
Speaker 1: should be general.
Speaker 4: And if they're serious about improving productivity, I think this
Speaker 4: should be the first place they look. Start by cutting
Speaker 4: the red tape that's hampering everything we do here in Australia.
Speaker 4: Moving on to the Herald Sun, now the headline is
Speaker 4: foot off the gas shock backflip. Alan government ditches edict
Speaker 4: forcing homes onto electric heating. Hundreds of thousands of Victorians
Speaker 4: will no longer have to switch gas heating systems to
Speaker 4: electric models when they break down under a major Alan
Speaker 4: government back down, but gas hot water systems that reach
Speaker 4: their end of life will have to be replaced with
Speaker 4: efficient electric appliances such as heat pumps under a watered
Speaker 4: down push to reduce gas use in homes. The exemption
Speaker 4: on heaters only applies to owner occupies, meaning landlords will
Speaker 4: still have to electrify both major appliances when gas models expire.
Speaker 5: Like cleans things up then.
Speaker 4: Doesn't even mean perfect. But secondly, this whole thing around
Speaker 4: home electrification is so silly, because where do you think
Speaker 4: your electricity is coming from. Victoria's having to import gas.
Speaker 4: Coal is still providing our electricity, so great you move
Speaker 4: from gas to electricity, it's still fossil fuels.
Speaker 3: And also it's coal which actually burns more than gas,
Speaker 3: which just does my head in the war and gas
Speaker 3: is inside.
Speaker 1: I think there might be a lot of hotty going
Speaker 1: for the.
Speaker 4: Victoria and also in the Herald Sun tomorrow. YouTube is
Speaker 4: in the crosshairs. YouTube's carve out from Australia's Landmarks social
Speaker 4: media ban on users under sixteen would be scrapped under
Speaker 4: a push from e Safety Commissioner Julie Inman grant her
Speaker 4: advice on the draft rules sent to the Communications Minister
Speaker 4: Anika Wells, comes as a survey reveals YouTube is the
Speaker 4: most frequently cited platform for harmful content. Now this is
Speaker 4: an interesting one because YouTube had previously been exempt because
Speaker 4: it was con educational and that is true, and there
Speaker 4: is a YouTube for kids which is much more educational
Speaker 4: and probably less harmful in the sense that you don't
Speaker 4: have algorithms pushing toxic content all the time. But I
Speaker 4: don't know, is this an overstep from these safety commission.
Speaker 3: My kids on YouTube and it is I don't know
Speaker 3: about harmber it's brain dead. But it's also that they
Speaker 3: absolutely love it. So you know, to quote mister t
Speaker 3: pity the fool that tries to take your kids. As
Speaker 3: long as they're not being contact, it's the contact and
Speaker 3: the bullying that you will.
Speaker 1: But that's what I would have.
Speaker 2: Thought, is that one of the biggest problems, apart from
Speaker 2: the absolute dross that they're being served up on social media,
Speaker 2: is the bullying asset.
Speaker 1: And then that's not happening through YouTube.
Speaker 5: Not not as far as I can tell with my kids.
Speaker 3: But anyway, over to the Courier mail and it's Jenetski's
Speaker 3: home run million dollar home help Treasure to unveil massive
Speaker 3: property purchase scheme. Treasure of David Genetski will today unveil
Speaker 3: the nation's most generous first home buyers scheme with Queenslanders
Speaker 3: to get government help to buy property worth up to
Speaker 3: one million dollars, which in Sydney would probably buy you
Speaker 3: a cast spot in Pott's point. Apparently in Queensland you
Speaker 3: can actually get a house for a million bucks, So
Speaker 3: good on them.
Speaker 1: I mean, who actually wants to own their house? With
Speaker 1: the government.
Speaker 2: That's my problem with these schemes. And surely it's inflation
Speaker 2: surely will you surely, surely it's inflationary as well. To
Speaker 2: get more money from me.
Speaker 5: Does and pushed our house rights. But it gets you
Speaker 5: in the door.
Speaker 3: And that's again, this is what John Howard did and
Speaker 3: made it very popular, drive up house prices to where
Speaker 3: they are now, which is why we have to keep
Speaker 3: doing it.
Speaker 5: But it helped first time buys get.
Speaker 1: Their home, indeed very quickly.
Speaker 2: Before we go to a break, Joe, you've you've got
Speaker 2: a funny story relating to a story on the front
Speaker 2: of the Mercury.
Speaker 5: Look, thank you, thank you very much. Caleb.
Speaker 3: Yes, well there's a little fashion show. It's Tasmania's only
Speaker 3: fashion festival, will soon transition from volunteer run to paid
Speaker 3: staff this year in the hopes of creating opportunities for
Speaker 3: and supporting local businesses and designers. And it reminded me
Speaker 3: of I love Tasmania. My wife and I we took
Speaker 3: our honeymoon and Tasmania and we're walking down the streets
Speaker 3: of Hobart and a bloke at a pub said, hey, mate,
Speaker 3: is your wife a model?
Speaker 5: No, No, we're just from the mainland.
Speaker 1: Ah, very good.
Speaker 2: Don't hold that one against me. When I'm down in
Speaker 2: Hobart in a few weeks time. I'm very much looking
Speaker 2: forward to getting down in it and spixing.
Speaker 1: Pubs with fireplaces of red wine and winter. Don't go
Speaker 1: anywhere after the break, We'll bring you our dope of
Speaker 1: the day. It is a cracker. Don't miss it.
Speaker 2: Some breaking news preliminary reports coming in from the wires
Speaker 2: that Donald Trump is indeed going to go to the
Speaker 2: NATO meeting at the Hague this week. He has certainly
Speaker 2: been a busy boy, and it will be overshadowed, of course,
Speaker 2: by the events in Iran. I think NATO was hoping
Speaker 2: that this would be reasonably uneventful meeting.
Speaker 1: It's not going to be so, and Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: going to make sure of that.
Speaker 2: Meanwhile, let's get into our dope of the day, and
Speaker 2: today we go to Queensland. A bunch of young criminals
Speaker 2: decided were.
Speaker 1: Leeched, I should say, alleged.
Speaker 2: Criminals decided that they would allegedly steal a motor vehicle
Speaker 2: and then allegedly fall asleep inside of it.
Speaker 13: Take a look, yeh India four point fifty can I
Speaker 13: get another car. Crew here, there's three people asleep in
Speaker 13: the vehicle. It's from f Anny Gray Police station. You're
Speaker 13: under a restaurant law for use of the motor vehicle.
Speaker 14: Take unders, get on the ground, take under us on
Speaker 14: the frieze god vehicle, Get on the ground.
Speaker 5: They're in custody.
Speaker 2: These three kids allegedly stole the car at eleven pm
Speaker 2: on Friday night and they picked up at nine o'clock
Speaker 2: the next morning taking a kip inside of it. I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, look, if you're going to steal a car,
Speaker 2: at least get a little bit away from it, not
Speaker 2: take a sleep in it.
Speaker 1: Could you do anything more incriminating?
Speaker 5: Poor kids?
Speaker 3: I mean, but what a way to wake up, especially
Speaker 3: of a hangover.
Speaker 4: Pretty horrible. They were clearly just tired after all of
Speaker 4: their criminal activities of the night before. But down in
Speaker 4: Melbourne this is bad or actually many good news for
Speaker 4: art lovers because this is an abomination. You might remember
Speaker 4: a couple of years ago the Yarra Council spent twenty
Speaker 4: two thousand dollars worth of road safety grants commissioning a
Speaker 4: yellow fruit artwork of a giant banana. But within days
Speaker 4: this sculpture was vandalized and removed, and apparently it's not
Speaker 4: coming back. There is still a tiny replica version in
Speaker 4: the town hall to remind people of this terrible event.
Speaker 4: But I think that's a win for humanity that that
Speaker 4: thing is off the street.
Speaker 5: You see, that's X rated at least not you know,
Speaker 5: I know feel.
Speaker 2: The mini version's actually gone missing as well, and probably
Speaker 2: in solidarity with this thing. And I know I've said
Speaker 2: every time you let the vandals have a win by
Speaker 2: not putting a statue back up like they're done with
Speaker 2: the Captain Cook stuff, then you're sending them the message
Speaker 2: that they can do it.
Speaker 1: But I'll tell you what, for the first.
Speaker 2: Time in my life, I'm going to say here on television,
Speaker 2: I support that kind of public vandalism.
Speaker 1: Thank you for joining us to break bring Patting your
Speaker 1: show to night